Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New poll, same public resistance to cuts (GOP still afraid to cut major gov't programs)
Washington Post ^ | 02/11/2011 | Jon Cohen

Posted on 02/11/2011 2:56:23 PM PST by SeekAndFind

A big obstacle for House Republicans eager to slash the federal budget deficit may be that Republicans nationally tend to shy away from spending cuts in many major government programs.

Budget cutting is a top priority for the GOP, with 70 percent of Republicans in a new survey by the Pew Research Center saying the federal government should focus on reducing the deficit, not new economic stimulus. And in many cases, more Republicans now support cuts than did so two years ago.

But across 18 areas of federal spending, a majority of Republicans support decreasing spending in just one: aid to the world's needy. In one other area, unemployment assistance, 50 percent of Republicans polled said they would decrease spending (far higher than the 11 percent who said they would increase it), but in all others the number saying funds should be cut is under the 50 percent mark.

When it comes to three big ticket items - Social Security, Medicare and defense spending - more Republicans want increases than decreases in federal outlays.

Support for budget cuts is, unsurprisingly, lower still among Democrats and independents.

(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: budget; deficit; gop; spendingcuts

1 posted on 02/11/2011 2:56:27 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Even with these marginal “cuts” the budget is going to go up. It’s all a sham, the GOP is too timid to actually do anything. I think the GOP leaders are trying to find ways to not cut anything.


2 posted on 02/11/2011 2:59:37 PM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php for FR backup site!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The mere mention of any polling data sends all 3-term or more Republicans scampering around, yelling at assistants to find out what these “cohonez” things are and where we can get them.


3 posted on 02/11/2011 3:00:08 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (Huguenot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In that case then just let them spend us in to total ruin. Just be ready to survive in the upcoming insanity. Maybe there is no hope. It can and is happening here. Just a matter of how long we have. I feel like I am in the movie Where Austrailia is the last country left after a Nuclear War.


4 posted on 02/11/2011 3:02:38 PM PST by screaminsunshine (34 States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In that case then just let them spend us in to total ruin. Just be ready to survive in the upcoming insanity. Maybe there is no hope. It can and is happening here. Just a matter of how long we have. I feel like I am in the movie Where Austrailia is the last country left after a Nuclear War.


5 posted on 02/11/2011 3:02:53 PM PST by screaminsunshine (34 States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In that case then just let them spend us in to total ruin. Just be ready to survive in the upcoming insanity. Maybe there is no hope. It can and is happening here. Just a matter of how long we have. I feel like I am in the movie Where Austrailia is the last country left after a Nuclear War.


6 posted on 02/11/2011 3:02:55 PM PST by screaminsunshine (34 States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Jon Cohen is the gatekeeper of liberal bias slanting of polling data published by the WaPo organization....

http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/how_do_you_know_what_a_poll_nu.php

Jon Cohen does that sort of screening for polling and survey data that journalists at the Washington Post wish to cite.

The Post maintains a short black list of pollsters—which Cohen would not disclose—who, by Cohen’s judgment, operate with serious methodological deficiencies, or have committed “serial misanalysis,” on the scale that their data is banned from publication. Other blue-chip organizations’ polls are trusted enough to be allowed into print without additional vetting. For pollsters in between, Cohen maintains a checklist on the paper’s intranet that helps reporters determine poll quality, and he is often called upon to decide whether data meets the paper’s standards.

“All the methodological concerns aside, at the end of the day, like any business, there are honest and dishonest brokers, and it takes a bit of time to figure it out,” says Cohen.

The Washington Post’s unit—in some ways modeled after Langer’s ABC shop, where Cohen used to work—also designs and commissions the paper’s own polling, where, since the paper can control every decision and step, even more exacting standards are imposed than those the Post applies to third party research.


7 posted on 02/11/2011 3:05:21 PM PST by JerseyHighlander (p.s. The word 'bloggers' is not in the freerepublic spellcheck dictionary?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I have no problem with timid Republicans shirking responsibility for making broad and substantial cuts, as long as they make those cuts.

Their tactic should be simple. Make a plan of massive, tremendous cuts. Then present the whole, huge, laundry list to the US senate, and say, “What is the bare minimum of these you demand be restored, for which you will vote for the budget?”

You see, the Republican’s ace in the hole is to threaten the Democrats.

“Unless you agree to lose most now, and preserve a few, when the Republicans take the senate in the next elections, and likely the presidency, the WHOLE list goes.”

So, for the first time, the Democrats will have a chance to be bi-partisan, instead of just demanding bi-partisanship from the Republicans. OR ELSE.


8 posted on 02/11/2011 3:07:08 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

9 posted on 02/11/2011 3:12:37 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

I would have a national referendum on which things should be cut... from a list of like 30 or so.

Then simply get everyone to promise to abide by the decision of the American people.


10 posted on 02/11/2011 3:13:27 PM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama = Epic Fail)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Completely defunding Obamacare would at least stall the rate of increase.


11 posted on 02/11/2011 3:14:08 PM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is why I advocate Budget transfers over cuts, Republicans nationally as with he general public nationally are going to have a hard time getting theses things under control.

A better way to go about solving the problem is to simply transfer theses programs in their entirety to the States and let the States one by one get rid of(or keep) them.

The reason is rather simply: While the majority of Americans might object to abolishing or seriously reducing Big Government welfare programs like Social Security or medicare, the stronger majority of Republicans in places like Oklahoma(for example) could probably get away with it.

How is that helpful to non-Oklahoman?

Simple once Oklahoma (again for example) does get away with it, the competitive pressures from Oklahoma will help drive other states to get rid of theses destructive programs, while also easing the fear against getting rid of em.(people will see that they don’t need theses programs in Oklahoma and how distributive they really are.)

Simply put republicans need to attack the big “welfare” programs by sending them lock stock and barrel to the States to be broken down, and destroyed on a state by state basis, and therefore eliminate the dependency fear.


12 posted on 02/11/2011 3:14:23 PM PST by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

*sigh*

I hope people are fine with national bankruptcy


13 posted on 02/11/2011 3:15:55 PM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php for FR backup site!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

I doubt they will pass that in the end


14 posted on 02/11/2011 3:17:21 PM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php for FR backup site!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Reagan wasn’t able to cut a dime in 8 years so I doubt a few freshmen GOP reps will either.


15 posted on 02/11/2011 3:27:17 PM PST by AmusedBystander (Republicans may have helped drive the economy into the ditch, but Obama is driving it off the cliff.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I am afraid you are right. There are too many George Bush Republicans in Congress. Right now they are afraid to oppose Conservatives who are energized and who have made possible their return to power. But they really wants as big a government as possible. If Pelosi had been willing to give concessions, through them a few bones, they would have gone the same way as the Blue Dogs.


16 posted on 02/11/2011 3:30:56 PM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AmusedBystander

Reagan didn’t have either House after January 1983. Besides, he cut a deal: a major defense building in return for let the Democrats have their domestic spending.


17 posted on 02/11/2011 3:33:30 PM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Reagan didn’t have either House after January 1983.

January 1987.

18 posted on 02/11/2011 3:35:53 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Publius

You are right of course. But he never had the House.


19 posted on 02/11/2011 3:39:45 PM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yep... even conservatives love Big Government - as long as the money is spent on THEIR pork!


20 posted on 02/11/2011 3:44:34 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmusedBystander
"Reagan wasn't able to cut a dime in 8 years."

Completely False. You are just echoing leftist propaganda which has been mindlessly picked up by rookies. I.e., you really are ignorant of the real Reagan history aren't you?

Start to educate yourself rookie: Read this article from the American Enterprise Institute

After you have actually learned something, then you can maybe contribute positively rather than being a foil for the communist schills who are trying to split up the conservative constitutionalist movement.

21 posted on 02/12/2011 8:55:00 AM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
I have come to the conclusion that the only way to shut down Obamacare for now is the freeze on government borrowing. It is the one Achilles Heel that Obama's administration has. We have to get every GOPer on board. Or else.

It will force him to stop his extra spending in its tracks while he pays China and Japan their interest. That is what we MUST do until we can take back the Senate (which should have happened this time around). The failures to do so weret due to corporate help of the leftists in Nevada, Maryland and Colorado prevented it from happening...and we should keep track of those corporate malefactors who are aiding and abetting communism...and then whack them good when we can finally regain the White House. They clearly are 'croney capitalists' and need to go. They are living off our dime, and it is time to take it away.

22 posted on 02/12/2011 9:02:42 AM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: Paul Ross

Well, one cannot freeze government borrowing. What one can do is to put a cap on the national debt. Even then it is hard to do this when we are at war. Three reasons to have a national debt: 1) to establish the credit of the U.S. Government;2) to make debtors with the interests of the of the government; and 3), to fund the government in time of war. The position of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency has helped us immensely, but that postion has become shaky.


24 posted on 02/12/2011 12:06:02 PM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

The leadership is terrified of being perceived as a threat to long standing deals cut with Washington Lobbyists and with interests back home. The Tea Parties are the only force that can get them to budge.


25 posted on 02/12/2011 12:12:09 PM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Comments go in the comment box.

Only the title goes in the title box—>


26 posted on 02/13/2011 1:18:44 PM PST by fightinJAG (Please STOP using the title box for parenthetical comments, snark, explanations, etc. Thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AmusedBystander
You are the disparaging insulter. If you voted for Reagan, then you will know he shut down the Interstate Commerce Commission during his Presidency, albeit the formal cessation took a while, finally going 'poof' in 1995).

As for your argument on his deficits, that is pure leftist talking points. Why do you think the left hated him so vigorously? He was trying to shut down much of the excess government.

As for your listed debt increases you allude to during his terms, the DEFENSE BUDGET was a vital part of that, and it was well worth it.

We defeated the Soviet Union, evading a nuclear armageddon and our annhilation. Just barely.

27 posted on 02/14/2011 1:26:49 PM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson